Essential Question:
- How do we transform a raw idea into a clearly articulated business concept, and what agreements make a team function well?
Learning Objectives:
- Evaluate business ideas against real-world viability and web-relevance criteria
- Articulate a business concept using a structured value proposition framework
- Assign team roles and establish working norms through a formal team agreement
Standards:
- NYS Next Generation Learning Standards RST.4.11-12 — Determine the meaning of symbols, key terms, and other content-specific words and phrases as they are used in scientific or technical sources.
- New York State Learning Standards CDOS 3a — Students will demonstrate mastery of the foundation skills and competencies essential for success in the workplace.
Materials:
Scaffolds:
Bridging Learning Gaps:
- Each group has a pre-generated idea/direction based on common interests from previous lesson
Differentiation:
- Printed idea prompt cards with example business categories for groups that struggle to generate ideas
- Sentence starters for the 60-second pitch for students who need language support
Extensions:
- Research a real competitor and identify gaps their business could fill
- Draft a simple SWOT analysis for their chosen idea
Opening Task
- Scholars will complete opening task on Schoology covering topics learned from HTML/CSS unit
- Randomly selected scholar will facilitate review with peers
Showcase and Social Capital Overview (15 Minutes)
- “Its not what you know, its who you know”
- Instructor reiterates the full unit arc: business idea → brand identity → wireframe → coded website → public deployment
- Emphasis on Student Showcase & Building Social Capital
Group Reveal & Team Warm-Up (10 Minutes)
- Instructor announces group assignments; students sit together
- Instructor sets the tone: teams are accountable to each other, not just to the grade
Business Ideation Workshop (45 Minutes)
-
Groups work through Handout 1 in four structured stages:
- Divergent brainstorm — each person generates 3–5 ideas independently before sharing
- Filter — eliminate ideas that fail the real / web-worthy / buildable tests
- Go deep — analyze top 2–3 survivors using customer, problem, differentiator, and pages prompts
- Commit — land on one idea and prepare a 60-second pitch
-
Key check-for-understanding questions to ask while circulating:
- “Who specifically is your customer — can you describe one real person?”
- “Why would someone choose your business over a Google search or a big competitor?”
- “What would a visitor actually do on your website?”
-
Instructor circulates continuously; challenge generic ideas early before groups get attached
Idea Share-Out & Instructor Checkpoint (15 Minutes)
- Each group delivers their 60-second pitch to the class
- Peers give one “warm” (what’s working) and one “wonder” (a question or concern)
- Instructor verbally approves ideas or flags ones that need revision before next class
- Document any ideas needing revision on Handout 2 approval line
Break (10 Minutes)
Articles of Organization (35 Minutes)
- Groups complete Handout 2 — the team agreement — covering:
- Role assignments (product owner, lead developer, UI/UX designer)
- Communication channel and response time norms
- Decision-making process for disagreements
- Conflict resolution steps
- Instructor reviews and signs each team’s agreement before they leave
- Completed, signed agreements collected at the door — no exceptions
Closing (10 Minutes)
- Exit ticket: “In two sentences, describe your business idea and the customer it serves”
Team Agreement Rubric
| Criteria | Exemplary (3) | Proficient (2) | Developing (1) | Not Yet (0) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Idea viability | Clearly real, web-relevant, and buildable; customer is specific | Mostly viable with minor gaps | Idea is vague or web-relevance is unclear | Idea does not meet basic criteria |
| Value proposition | Customer, problem, and differentiator all articulated clearly | Two of three elements clearly articulated | One element clear; others vague | No coherent value proposition |
| Role assignment | All three roles assigned with responsibilities understood | Roles assigned but responsibilities unclear | Roles partially assigned | No role structure established |
| Working norms | Specific, realistic norms for communication and conflict | Most norms present; some vague | One or two norms listed | No norms established |
| Team buy-in | All members signed; everyone can speak to the idea | Signed; uneven enthusiasm | Partially completed | Not submitted |